DOCSLIB.ORG

Organic Agriculture in Kenya and Uganda

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Organic Agriculture in Kenya and Uganda View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CGSpace Organic agriculture in Kenya and Uganda STUDY VISIT REPORT Charles Walaga CTA number 8033 This report was produced following a study visit to Kenya and Uganda, 19–30 April 2004. The visit was sponsored by CTA and organised in collaboration with the Organisation for Rural Research and Development (ORREDE) and the Sustainable Agriculture Community Development Project (SACDEP–Kenya). The Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) was established in 1983 under the Lomé Convention between the ACP (African, Caribbean and Pacific) Group of States and the European Union Member States. Since 2000, it has operated within the framework of the ACP-EC Cotonou Agreement. CTA’s tasks are to develop and provide services that improve access to information for agricultural and rural development, and to strengthen the capacity of ACP countries to produce, acquire, exchange and utilise information in this area. CTA’s programmes are designed to: provide a wide range of information products and services and enhance awareness of relevant information sources; promote the integrated use of appropriate communication channels and intensify contacts and information exchange (particularly intra-ACP); and develop ACP capacity to generate and manage agricultural information and to formulate ICM strategies, including those relevant to science and technology. CTA’s work incorporates new developments in methodologies and cross-cutting issues such as gender and social capital. Published by: Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) Postbus 380, 6700 AJ Wageningen, The Netherlands Tel: +31 317 467100; fax +31 317 460067; e-mail [email protected]; Website http://www.cta.int CTA: November 2005 Prepared by: Charles Walaga, Organisation for Rural Research and Development (ORREDE), PO Box 27317, Kampala, Uganda Edited by: Words at Work, West Hill House, 6 Swains Lane, London N6 6QS, UK CTA’s Working Document series consists of material that, in view of its immediate relevance and practical use to specific readerships, the Centre wishes to make available without the delays inherent in the formal publication process. These Working Documents have not gone through this process and should be cited accordingly. Comments on matters of substance are welcome, and should be addressed directly to CTA. ii Contents Acknowledgements iv Summary 1 Acronyms 6 Introduction 9 The study visit in Uganda 15 The study visit in Kenya 37 Recommendations 45 Conclusion 48 Annexes 1 Criteria for participation in the study visit 50 2 List of participants in the study visit 51 3 Study visit programme, 19–30 April 2004 53 4 Groups, organisations and institutions visited 54 5 Members of the IFOAM-Africa Advisory Committee 55 6 Background papers: Uganda 56 7 Background paper: Kenya 70 8 Background paper: Tanzania 72 9 Background paper: Zimbabwe 75 10 Background paper: Madagascar 77 11 Background paper: Sudan 84 iii Organic agriculture in Kenya and Uganda Acknowledgements CTA wishes to thank the Organisation for Rural Research and Development (ORREDE) and its partner, the Sustainable Agriculture Community Development Programme (SACDEP)-Kenya, for organising the study visit. The Centre would also like to thank the farmer groups, community-based organisations (CBOs), non-governmental organisations (NGOs), companies, and training and research institutions who shared their experiences with the study visit participants. CTA hopes that this study visit report will contribute to a better understanding of the organic subsector in African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries and that the links forged will develop into fruitful partnerships. iv Summary Summary The objective of the study visit to Kenya and Uganda in April 2004, sponsored by the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) and focusing on organic agriculture, was: ‘Improved information and communication in African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries on best practices and added value production and certification of organic products (including medicinal plants)’. The 20 participants in the visit were stakeholders in the production and certification of organic products, including medicinal plants, in Uganda and Kenya. The expected results were: • Exchange of information among participants; • Analysis of best practices observed in the field; • Recommendations for follow-up actions. The participants were drawn from eight ACP countries (Grenada, Kenya, Madagascar, Mozambique, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda and Zimbabwe) and one European Union (EU) country (Austria) (see Annex 2). At the opening meeting in Kampala, Uganda on 19 April, the participants were briefed on the study visit programme, aims and objectives and given information on the agricultural sector in Uganda, particularly the organic subsector. In Uganda, the participants visited projects involving rural farmers who had adopted organic agriculture, a university’s organic agriculture neighbourhood schools outreach programme, and enterprises focusing on honey production, processing and marketing, medicinal grass processing, and sweet banana and pineapple processing. In Kenya, field visits were made to organic agriculture training institutes and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), organic farms, and small honey and medicinal plant processing enterprises. At the end of each day the participants discussed and synthesised their experiences and observations. The final group synthesis session was held in Nairobi, Kenya on 29 April. The study visit programme is reproduced in Annex 3. The main issues affecting organic agriculture in developing countries, as identified by the study visit participants, are given here. Organic agriculture as a strategy for production intensification Throughout the ACP regions the size of landholdings is diminishing, posing a major challenge to farmers to produce adequate food and income for their families. During the field visits, the study team was able to observe and discuss with farmers and extension agents the successes in efforts to intensify production by applying organic agriculture principles and practices, resulting in an increasing number of NGO and formal training institutions offering training in organic agriculture. In Uganda and Zimbabwe, school outreach programmes in organic agriculture are being promoted. 1 Organic agriculture in Kenya and Uganda It was noted, however, that these successes are not well documented and disseminated, and little information about them reaches researchers and policy-makers. Media coverage of this subsector is limited. This all serves to constrain the development of local markets for organic produce. The study visit participants recommended that the quality and availability of information about organic agriculture should be improved, that a list of publications and institutions focusing on organic agriculture be compiled and that a technical journal on organic agriculture in tropical and sub-tropical regions be launched. They also recommended greater use of local media to raise awareness about organic agriculture and its potential. Networking to promote information exchange and policy advocacy The participants voiced the need for better networking among organic agriculture practitioners and other stakeholders to improve the exchange of information and strengthen policy advocacy. In Madagascar, for example, a network among traders in organic agriculture products does not include farmers; in Sudan, the University of Khartoum’s work on organic agriculture appears to be isolated from other stakeholders; and in Grenada and Mozambique there are no formal organic agriculture networks at all. Among the formal networks that do exist is Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (PELUM), a regional membership organisation launched in 1995 and covering Eastern and Southern Africa. There is also the National Organic Agriculture Movement of Uganda (NOGAMU) established in 2001, and a national network is being set up in Kenya. The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) has also established an Africa desk in Kampala to promote increased networking and policy advocacy in organic agriculture in Africa. The study team recommended strengthening national and regional organic networks in order to improve information exchange and dissemination and to foster the pooling of resources for better advocacy. The recently established IFOAM office in Uganda could play a crucial role here. National organic agriculture policies and institutional frameworks The study visit participants noted that most ACP countries lack national organic agriculture policies. They attributed this to poor awareness and understanding of organic agriculture among policy-makers and decision-makers. The successes achieved to date in developing the subsector stem mainly from the economic liberalisation polices enacted by many ACP governmentss, but the subsector will not realise its full potential unless there are explicit government organic agriculture policies and programmes in place that enable it to access the required financial, technical and institutional resources. The participants recommended the formulation of national organic agriculture policies. These would not only make the necessary resources available, they would also enable national, regional and international development partners to identify priority areas for support. 2 Summary Supporting ACP research on organic agriculture It was
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 3 Agriculture in Kenya: Large- Versus Small-Scale Farming
    3 Agriculture in Kenya: Large- versus Small-Scale Farming Large-scale farming and structural change Before we embark on a chronological account of the changes and developments in Kenya's agriculture it would be helpful to look at the structural changes brought about by the setting up of large­ scale agricultural estates by European settlers. The history of development or lack of development in the rural areas of Kenya has been largely determined by the imposition of this type of farm­ ing on the country. Did the kind of agriculture brought by the settlers lead to development? The following sections will show that after forty difficult years it brought about prosperity within the European-settled areas, but that it was directly responsible for (a) holding back agricultural development in other areas, (b) the poli­ tical explosion in the 1950s, (c) creating the 'peasant capitalist' from the late 1950s and finally (d) the gross underdevelopment in the areas of the nomadic pastoralists. First let us examine the reasons why this large-scale farming was able to succeed. Up to the mid-1950s the settlers' success was un­ doubtedly at the expense of the African farmers. A large proportion of the land and labour force, capital, administration, communi­ cations and marketing were directed by the colonial authorities with a favourable bias towards the settler section of production. The mechanics of this channeling of resources will be discussed in other chapters. Initially and up to the mid-1950s the settler and peasant pro­ ducers were in competition for the above resources. It was essen­ tially a competition between a few large estates and very many small peasant plots to see which could produce the most cheaply.
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping of Studies on Employment Creation of Agriculture and Agro-Processing in Kenya
    MAPPING OF STUDIES ON EMPLOYMENT CREATION OF AGRICULTURE AND AGRO-PROCESSING IN KENYA FINAL REPORT By Dr. Matthew Muma July 2016 Table of Contents Abbreviations and Acronyms ...................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................... iv Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... v 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Objectives of the Study ..................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Organization of the Study ................................................................................................. 3 2. SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS .................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Macro-economic Profile .................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Current Initiatives in Employment Creation in Agricultural Value Chains ........................... 7 2.2.1 Agriculture .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Read More About SDG Bond Framework
    1 C1 - Public Natixis Summary FOREWORD ........................................................................................................................................... 3 ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................................... 4 PART I: Benin mobilised for the 2030 Agenda ....................................................................................... 5 1. The basics about the Republic of Benin .......................................................................................... 5 1.1 Political and administrative organisation of Benin ..................................................................... 6 1.2 A predominately young and rural population ............................................................................. 6 1.3 Human development indicators are improving .......................................................................... 8 1.4 Benin’s economic structure ........................................................................................................ 8 1.5 The authorities’ response to the Covid-19 pandemic ................................................................ 9 2. Actions and policies closely anchored to the 2030 Agenda .......................................................... 11 2.1 Actions for taking ownership of the 2030 Agenda ................................................................... 11 2.2 Mobilising institutions and transforming public action to reach the SDGs ..............................
    [Show full text]
  • Potential of Contract Farming As a Mechanism for the Commercialisation of Smallholder Agriculture
    POTENTIAL OF CONTRACT FARMING AS A MECHANISM FOR THE COMMERCIALISATION OF SMALLHOLDER AGRICULTURE THE ZIMBABWE CASE STUDY REPORT PREPARED FOR: FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANISATION (FAO) John J. Woodend September 2003 1 Acknowledgements The ongoing initiative on contract farming has largely resulted from the unstinting efforts of Dr. Tobais Takavarasha who has worked tirelessly to promote contract farming in Zimbabwe. I am grateful to the many people (Appendix 2) who took time of their busy schedules to either meet with me or answer several questions over the phone. I am particularly grateful to David Mfote (MoLARR); Roy Bvekerwa (Hortico); Rob Jarvis (Quton); Chris Lightfoot (Tanganda Tea Estates); E. Chenyika (Southdown Tea Estates); A. Gagiano (Mkwasine Sugar Estates); Kristian Jensen (Khula Sizwe Trust); Atwell Muropa (IDC); Phil Cunningham, Dave Irvine and Graeme Murdoch (Irvines Day Old Chicks); Ian Goggin (ZIMACE); and Raphael Zuze and B. Chipanera (ARDA) who generously shared their views on contract farming with me The study has also benefited from the advice and guidance provided by members of the interim Steering Committee on Contract Farming, i.e. Dr. Tobias Takavarasha, David Mfote (MoLARR), Reggie Mugwara (SADC FANR Hub), Dr. David Rohrbach (ICRISAT), Basilio Sandamu (HPC) and Susan Minae (FAO). However, the opinions expressed herein are those of the Consultant and should not be attributed to any member of the Steering Committee. The following people readily provided relevant reports and publications at short notice: Alexandra Rottger (FAO, Rome); Thomas Jayne (Michigan State University, USA); Clive Drew (USAID Agribusiness Development Unit, Kampala, Uganda); Christopher Delgado and Nicholas Minot (IFPRI, USA); Andrew Dorward (Wye College,UK); and Jonathan Coulter, Rachel Springfellow and Anne Tallontire (Natural Resources Institute, UK).
    [Show full text]
  • The Geography of Welfare in Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte D'ivoire, and Togo
    Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized The Geography of Welfare in Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, and Togo Public Disclosure Authorized Nga Thi Viet Nguyen and Felipe F. Dizon Public Disclosure Authorized 00000_CVR_English.indd 1 12/6/17 2:29 PM November 2017 The Geography of Welfare in Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, and Togo Nga Thi Viet Nguyen and Felipe F. Dizon 00000_Geography_Welfare-English.indd 1 11/29/17 3:34 PM Photo Credits Cover page (top): © Georges Tadonki Cover page (center): © Curt Carnemark/World Bank Cover page (bottom): © Curt Carnemark/World Bank Page 1: © Adrian Turner/Flickr Page 7: © Arne Hoel/World Bank Page 15: © Adrian Turner/Flickr Page 32: © Dominic Chavez/World Bank Page 48: © Arne Hoel/World Bank Page 56: © Ami Vitale/World Bank 00000_Geography_Welfare-English.indd 2 12/6/17 3:27 PM Acknowledgments This study was prepared by Nga Thi Viet Nguyen The team greatly benefited from the valuable and Felipe F. Dizon. Additional contributions were support and feedback of Félicien Accrombessy, made by Brian Blankespoor, Michael Norton, and Prosper R. Backiny-Yetna, Roy Katayama, Rose Irvin Rojas. Marina Tolchinsky provided valuable Mungai, and Kané Youssouf. The team also thanks research assistance. Administrative support by Erick Herman Abiassi, Kathleen Beegle, Benjamin Siele Shifferaw Ketema is gratefully acknowledged. Billard, Luc Christiaensen, Quy-Toan Do, Kristen Himelein, Johannes Hoogeveen, Aparajita Goyal, Overall guidance for this report was received from Jacques Morisset, Elisée Ouedraogo, and Ashesh Andrew L. Dabalen. Prasann for their discussion and comments. Joanne Gaskell, Ayah Mahgoub, and Aly Sanoh pro- vided detailed and careful peer review comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Operational Eoa- I Project Report for Benin 2018
    0 REPUBLIC OF BENIN -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Organisation Béninoise Pour la Promotion de l’Agriculture Biologique (OBEPAB) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Project Mainstreaming Ecological Organic Agriculture (EOA) intoNational Policies, Strategies and Programmes in Africa Technical annual report for 2018 Reporting Period: January to December 2018 Supported by 0 1 Table content Page 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 3 3. Major achievements ............................................................................................................................ 3 4. Challenges of EOA Implementation in Benin ..................................................................................... 7 5. Lessons to be learnt in EOA Implementation in Benin ...................................................................... 7 6. Recommendations and Conclusions in EOA Implementation in Benin ............................................ 8 1 2 1. Introduction Agriculture is the basis of the national economy. It occupies almost 70% of the active population and contributes 38% of GDP. However, current production systems, farmers use mostly mineral fertilizers for soil fertilization and synthetic chemical pesticides for pest management. Chemicals are used for other purposes among which are for food storage.
    [Show full text]
  • Bigwala Mus Ic and Dance of the Bas Oga People
    BIGWALA MUSIC AND DANCE OF THE BASOGA PEOPLE written by James Isabirye 2012 Background The Basoga are Bantu speaking people who live in southeastern Uganda. They are neighbors to the Baganda, Bagwere, Basamia, Banyoli and Banyoro people. The Basoga are primarily subsistence agricultural people. "Bigwala” is a Lusoga language term that refers to a set of five or more monotone gourd trumpets of different sizes. The music of the trumpets and the dance performed to that music are both called “Bigwala”. Five drums accompany “Bigwala” music and they include a big drum “Engoma e ne ne ”, a long drum “Omugaabe,” short drum “Endyanga”, a medium size drum “Mbidimbidi” and a small drum “Enduumi ” each of which plays a specific role in the set. Bigwala heritage is of significant palace / royal importance because of its ritualistic role during burial of kings, coronations and their anniversaries and stands as one of the main symbols of Busoga kingship. When King Henry Wako M uloki passed away on 1st September 2008, the "Bigwala" players were invited to Nakabango palace and Kaliro burial ground to perform their funeral function. 1 During the coronation of late king Henry Wako Muloki on 11th February 1995; the Bigwala players performed their ritual roles. It is important to note that Busoga kingdom like all others had been abolished in 1966 by the Ugandan republic government of Obote I and all aspects its existence were jeopardised including the Bigwala. The Kingship is the only main uniting identity which represents the Basoga, offers them opportunity to exist in a value system, focuses their initiatives to deal with development issues with in the framework of their ethnic society and connects them to their cherished past.
    [Show full text]
  • Adoption of Conservation Agriculture in Uganda: a Case Study of the Lango Subregion
    sustainability Article Adoption of Conservation Agriculture in Uganda: A Case Study of the Lango Subregion Sara Kaweesa 1,* , Saidi Mkomwa 2 and Willibald Loiskandl 3 1 Centre for Development Research, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU), Peter-Jordan-Strasse 76, 1190 Vienna, Austria 2 African Conservation Tillage Network (ACT), P.O. Box 10375, Nairobi 00100, Kenya; [email protected] 3 Institute of Hydraulics and Rural Water Management, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Muthgasse 18, 1190 Vienna, Austria; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +43-676-43-808-26 Received: 8 August 2018; Accepted: 18 September 2018; Published: 20 September 2018 Abstract: Conservation agriculture (CA) is based on three principles: minimum soil disturbance, maintaining a soil cover through mulching with crop residues or planting cover crops, and practicing crop rotations. CA is practiced in many parts of the world for its benefits to soil and ability to improve yields, among others. There is little documented information on the status of CA adoption in the Lango region in mid-Northern Uganda. This study aimed at determining the extent of CA adoption in relation to the socioeconomic status of the farming population and suggesting relevant strategies for accelerating CA uptake specific to this region. A non-discriminative snowball-sampling technique was used to gather data from 417 households spread over three districts. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using household questionnaires. Farmers’ uptake of CA was related to information gained from training and the benefits that were observed in their fields. Some farm-level constraints in the region included the diminutive ratio of shared tools and equipment; the minimum presence and involvement of extension services; and seasonal rural markets that are dominated by middlemen.
    [Show full text]
  • Consulting Services)
    Request for Expression of Interests (Consulting Services) FOR ECONOMIC AND SECTOR WORK ON AGRICULTURAL VALUE CHAIN STUDY IN UGANDA Agriculture sector in Uganda is a key sector and also will remain the main economic base of the country. As a result, future rate of poverty reduction, overall economic growth, social development and political stability of the country will depend on the growth trajectory of the sector. The President of Uganda, His Excellency, Yoweri Museveni, has recently called for the transformation of Agriculture in Uganda from subsistence to a commercial oriented sector. The end result of agricultural transformation in Uganda are millions of would be thriving small-, medium, and large-scale agribusinesses in every segment of agricultural value chains. In order to better understand the growth potentials and constraints of the agriculture sector and optimize its intervention in the sector, the Bank aims to conduct agricultural value chain study. The main tasks of the study are to prioritize, select and conduct a detailed value chains analysis of priority agricultural commodities. The findings of the study will serve as a guide to design the Ugandan Agricultural Transformation Agenda (UATA), investment direction of the Bank and other development partners. Promoting agriculture and agro-industry/business is recognized as one of the most effective ways to drive inclusive growth and reduce poverty. The African Development Bank (AfDB) is launching study that will inform the development of competitive regional and global value chains with the potential for advancing Uganda’s economic prosperity, increasing food security, job creation and poverty reduction. The study will also inform the Bank’s public sector operations towards creation of an enabling environment especially relating to land tenure policies and laws, financial inclusion efforts, and Private Public Partnerships in physical infrastructure development.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate-Smart Agriculture Manual for Zimbabwe, Climate Technology Centre and Network, Denmark, 2017
    Climate-Smart Agriculture supporting low carbon and climate resilient development Climat e-Smart A griculture Manual f or A griculture Educ The Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN) fosters technology transfer and deployment at the request of developing countries through three core services: technical assistance, capacity building and scaling up international collaboration. The Centre is the operational arm of the UNFCCC Technology Mechanism, it is hosted and managed by Email: [email protected] the United Nations Environment and the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation Web: www.ctc-n.org (UNIDO), and supported by more than 300 network partners around the world. ation in Zimbab CTCN Supported by: w e United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Climate-Smart Ministry of Agriculture, Mechanisation and Irrigation Development Department of Agriculture Education and Farmer Training Agriculture Manual Ngungunyana Building No. 1 Borrowdale Road for Agriculture Education in Zimbabwe Harare, Zimbabwe Tel: +263 (0) 4 797390 Email: [email protected] www.moa.gov.zw Ministry of Environment, Water and Climate 11th Floor, Kaguvi Building, Cnr S. V. Muzenda Street and Central Avenue, Harare, Zimbabwe Tel: +263-4-701681/3 e-mail: [email protected] website: www.climatechange.org.zw Climate-SmartClimate-SmartClimate-SmartClimate-Smart AAAgricultureAgriculturegriculturegriculture Manual ManualManual Manual for ffAororgriculturefor AA griculturegricultureAgriculture Educ EducEduc Educationationationation in Zimbab inin
    [Show full text]
  • Kenya: Agricultural Sector
    Public Disclosure Authorized AGRICULTURE GLOBAL PRACTICE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PAPER Public Disclosure Authorized KENYA AGRICULTURAL SECTOR RISK ASSESSMENT Public Disclosure Authorized Stephen P. D’Alessandro, Jorge Caballero, John Lichte, and Simon Simpkin WORLD BANK GROUP REPORT NUMBER 97887 NOVEMBER 2015 Public Disclosure Authorized AGRICULTURE GLOBAL PRACTICE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PAPER KENYA Agricultural Sector Risk Assessment Stephen P. D’Alessandro, Jorge Caballero, John Lichte, and Simon Simpkin Kenya: Agricultural Sector Risk Assessment © 2015 World Bank Group 1818 H Street NW Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org E-mail: [email protected] All rights reserved This volume is a product of the staff of the World Bank Group. The fi ndings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper do not necessarily refl ect the views of the Executive Directors of the World Bank Group or the governments they represent. The World Bank Group does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank Group concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. World Bank Group encourages dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission to reproduce portions of the work promptly. For permission to photocopy or reprint any part of this work, please send a request with complete information to the Copyright Clear- ance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA, telephone: 978-750-8400, fax: 978-750-4470, http://www.copyright .com/.
    [Show full text]
  • Agriculture in Uganda
    ENHANCING AGRICULTURAL RESILIENCE AND SUSTAINABILITY IN EASTERN AND SOUTHERN AFRICA Key Findings and Recommendations for Uganda Drake N. Mubiru, Jalia Namakula, William Nanyeenya, James Lwasa, Godfrey Otim, Joselyn Kashagama and Milly Nakafeero 1 Contents Agriculture in Uganda A New Approach to Agriculture 4 Project Overview 5 SIMLESA-Uganda 6 Strategic Approach 6 Project Sites 7 Partners 7 Key Findings 8 Smallholder Farmers’ Food Security, Productivity, and Incomes Levels 9 Strategies to Improve Resilience, Reduce Risks and Protect Natural Resources 9 Gender and Equity 10 Supporting Mechanisms and Partnerships 10 Achievements Farmer Reach and Adoption 11 Improved Varieties Released 11 Capacity Strengthening 11 Opportunties for Integrating the New Approaches into Maize Farming Systems 12 Packages for Farmers 12 Factors Preventing the Widespread Adoption of CASI Technologies 14 Successes to Date 16 A Sustainable Future for Farming and Food Systems 17 Scaling the New Approaches 17 What is at Stake? 15 Conclusion 15 References 16 2 List of Figures 1. Conservation agriculture based on sustainable intensification 4 2. SIMLESA-Uganda project sites: Lira and Nakasongola districts and the cattle corridor 7 3. The impact of different tillage practices on bean grain yields, with and without fertilizer 10 4. The impact of different tillage practices on maize grain yields, with and without fertilizer 10 List of Tables 1. Summary of CASI options for two of Uganda’s agroecological zones 13 List of Acronyms ACIAR Australian Centre for International Agricultural
    [Show full text]